Dear Atheists: Welcome to the discussion.
I think it's just fine and dandy that you have a belief, and you have a support group for that belief.
However there ARE a few rules for people professing a religious faith, which you ARE doing.
...
You have to learn about your belief, so you can explain it. Since you now are now a religious zealot, it is no longer good enough for you to lean back in your chair and just criticize other people.
..
You have to now live as you believe and believe as you live. Since you proclaim your belief passionately, there is no room for hypocrites. Because you wish to base your life on scientific principles of absolute physical evidence and scientific methods, you may no longer follow astrology or any other occultist practice, such as tarot cards, psychic readings, etc. That means no more Harry Potter movies or books, unless you are really a “Satanist” pretending to be an “atheist”. No more vampire books and movies. Gambling, which is mostly depending on magical “luck”, to the atheist will now be frowned upon, because it truly is faith-based. You have to have a lot of faith to spend hundreds of dollars each year believing that you might win a million $.
..
I mentioned "scientific methods". Now, you have arrived in the world of science. You now must be able to "prove" everything. For example: You must prove evolution takes place by using real-life examples. If it's just bones dug up, that's not good enough. I want "proof" that a monkey can evolve into a man, not theories. If it’s “scientific”, then you should be able to reproduce it. If you can’t reproduce your scientific theory, then it’s only a theory or a faith-based belief. If your only proof is rolling your eyes and telling me how ignorant I must be, that's not proof. It's stalling. I also want proof that it is possible to create brand new life out of inert substances, so get out your chemistry set. To my knowledge, no human has ever done this before. Richard Dawkins did not have a very good answer when Ben Stein asked him how the first living cell was created. The evolutionist's general answer is:"a lightning bolt struck a pile of mud, and miraculously, a living cell was created that had its own internal organs, its own genetic code, and the ability to reproduce by itself until it magically developed male and female versions of organisms. If you cannot create new life in a laboratory, then all the theorizing about evolution is a mute point. You don’t have evolution if you do not have a beginning.

Sweet merciful crap. This is like an ignorant fundie grab-bag of incoherent, painfully stupid non-arguments that have been debunked innumerable times, all smashed together and thrown at a poor, abused keyboard somewhere in the hopes that someone, somewhere, will be impressed by conserv's blatherings. If these weren't all very common positions we've all seen on this website hundreds of times before, I would immediately call Poe. But since we have, my brain is full of fuck.

Atheism is the lack of belief in any gods. That's it. The rest of this is just standard fundie bullshit.
EDIT:
"That means no more Harry Potter movies or books, unless you are really a 'Satanist' pretending to be an 'atheist'. No more vampire books and movies."
I can read those books and watch those movies while still being an atheist because unlike you I am able to distinguish fact from fiction.

Dear stupid,
My "religious faith" merely consists of not finding any evidence for the existence of any gods. I wouldn't say it is passionately nor zealous. I find religious people somewhat amusing, but as long as they don't try to force it onto me, it's no problem for me to socialize with them.

I have never followed astrology, tarot card or psychic readings, and I don't like gambling, I don't even like simple board games. There is nothing Satanistic about Harry Potter, it's rather a Jesus allegory. Reading a book and finding it entertaining and/or amusing is not to "follow" or worship it, stupid.

Atheism has nothing to do with science, really. I don't have to prove evolution, thousands upon thousands of certified scientists have already done that.
A person believing him/herself to be so analytic ought to know what a scientific theory is, that something HAS to be proven before it becomes a theory.

Isn't dust an inert substance? What did God make Adam of?
Richard Dawkins probably had a very good answer for Ben Stein, the problem is that neither you nor Ben understood the answer.

Evolution is only about adaptation through random mutations and natural selection. If you want a beginning, then you want abiogenesis, which does not have as much evidence nor as strong a theory as evolution does.

I don't believe in 'occultist' practises, Tarot cards and psychic readings, precisely for that reason, so that's fine.

But woah, I'm not allowed to read fiction if it's not true? Since when were you required to believe everything you read? You'll notice that the only people who actually believe Vampires and evil magic to be real are 'true Christians' such as yourself.

Gambling is not based on luck. There is no such thing as luck. Intelligent gambling is based on statistics and mathematics, once again; You're the only person here who professes to believe in luck.

Easy, we can prove evolution. Nylon was invented in 1935, there is a bacteria that can eat nylon, an entirely synthetic fibre. How did that happen except through evolution? All this 'monkey to man' crap is creationist bullshit created to distract from the holes in your own dogma.

Abiogenesis is a young but promising science. It has been demonstrated that primitive self-replicating matter can form from a combination of amino acids and electricity. The fact that you mentioned internal organs in conjunction with cells says a lot about your intelligence.

While belief in a creator god and belief in the supernatural tend to overlap in individuals, they are not the same thing nor are they mutually inclusive. There are atheists who believe in ghosts and magic, and there is no "hypocrisy" because their beliefs are internally consistent, ie, they believe that ghosts and magic do not require a god to explain them.

So you expect to win the game by making up rules that say the other team can't win?
There are two ways this can end:
- Nobody cares about your rules and you run home crying because they're so mean.
- Nobody cares about your game and you run home crying because you're all alone.

A "belief" (there is no God) isn't the same as "a religious faith", is it? I can have the reasonable belief "The sun will rise tomorrow" but it's not a religious idea. I am agnostic, so I don't even have a positive certainty either way on the God question.
"Because you wish to base your life on scientific principles of absolute physical evidence and scientific methods...". I don't particularly. I think these things are a good basic way of understanding the world, but there has to be a huge amount of room for emotion, intuition, art, love, pleasure, and also for entertainment.
A reasoning person can enjoy fiction, and suspend disbelief, without ceasing to be a reasoning person. A reasoning person can even enjoy the Bible as fiction.
Gambling is a fool's game, and most intelligent people already know that. You don't even need to be an atheist to know that.
... If you discount inductive reasoning, then we would hardly be able to establish anything beyond what is immediately obvious. And as I'm sure others will point out, the evidence is there. And I'm sure others will be able to correct your crude version of the origin of life.
...And now, to turn the tables. Where is your proof? Where is your evidence? Even if we take evolution and the scientific views of the origins of life as hypotheses and not facts, is your theory thereby proved, or even made more plausible or likely? NO.
What you've got is still, only one thing; a book, and the following reasoning: The book is right because the book says it's right therefore the book is right.
The scientists have got a universe full of evidence from which they construct theories. That outweighs any one book, especially a book of mythology, ancient laws, and strange stories. Even if the theories are completely wrong, they have the potential to be improved upon or superseded by better theories, unlike your text, which is so much a victim of translation and interpretation as to be almost incomprehensible.